Anthony wrote: > Being devised and implemented unilaterally is the only way to get > accurate results.
There's no harm in discussing the methodology (but not the specific targets or IP addresses), thereby confirming its validity and ensuring that the effort isn't needlessly duplicated by multiple editors across countless articles. If general knowledge of the experiment were likely to impact its results, Gwern's public acknowledgment would have had that effect anyway. > Removing 100 random external links? For a few weeks? Then adding > back the ones that deserve to be added back? Where and when did Gwern specify a time frame and indicate that the appropriate links would be restored? > Okay, I'm imagining it.... Sounds like something that would > improve the encyclopedia. Again, what if hundreds or thousands of users, whose methodologies are undiscussed and potentially flawed, were to take it upon themselves to conduct such "experiments" without consultation or approval? That's the hypothetical scenario to which I referred. > [rolls eyes] That's unconstructive. David Levy _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l